On Our "Virtual Route 66" This Week: On the Week That Was

 

Our team chose this for the headline to pay homage to one of the leading thinkers and innovators of our time:  the great Galileo.   We present a snapshot of the week that was on the "Vision" Front:

The Briefing  By Martin Peers December 1, 2022 Greetings! Is big tech killing itself? Recent mass layoffs at tech companies—which continued this week with cuts at DoorDash—have destroyed the image of big tech firms as lean and efficient machines. On the contrary: As investors such as Altimeter Capital and TCI have pointed out, firms like Google and Meta Platforms (not to mention Amazon) are overstaffed and bureaucratic. But a bigger issue may be signs that big tech services such as Google search and Amazon shopping are losing their luster with consumers. Consider just a few data points. Earlier this month, Freakonomics Radio aired a podcast titled “Is Google Getting Worse?” that looked in detail at how the quality of Google search has deteriorated in recent years. Last week, The Washington Post ran a detailed article by its tech columnist, Geoff Fowler, headlined: “It’s Not Your Imagination: Shopping on Amazon Is Getting Worse.” His main complaint is that ads now dominate Amazon's search results. Also last week, The Wall Street Journal noted that Amazon’s ranking on the American Customer Satisfaction Index had fallen to a record low. Amazon used to brag about the fact that it was regularly at the top of that survey, but it was noticeably silent about the recent change to its score. In July, meanwhile, the index reported that Google’s ranking had dropped below that of a group of smaller search engines. This all suggests these companies have deviated from their original visions. Remember Amazon founder Jeff Bezos’ mantra about “customer obsession”? As he said in a 1997 shareholder letter—which he reprinted in subsequent shareholder letters—“we will continue to focus relentlessly on our customers.” It’s no secret retail margins are very thin. But solving that problem by jamming a bunch of ads onto the site shows a relentless focus on the bottom line, not on customers. Ditto for Google, whose founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, claimed in a public letter for their 2004 initial public offering that “serving our end users is at the heart of what we do and remains our number one priority.”  We all know what comes next. When you alienate customers by serving up a worse version of your product, they go elsewhere—eventually. Indeed, CNBC reported last week that Walmart had overtaken Amazon as the place to search online for Black Friday deals. Still, it might take a long time for any shift in consumer behavior to become apparent in company revenues. And that kind of gradual change is not well covered by the news media. Reporters much prefer the drama of Elon Musk’s Twitter antics or a corporate collapse. But when we look back at this moment in time, the more significant story may be the one occurring more subtly in the background: how big tech killed its golden goose. Apple v. Everyone It might be Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong’s turn to visit Tim Cook down in Cupertino, Calif. Maybe they can take a stroll together around Apple headquarters, tweet by the pond and resolve their differences, the same way Cook and Elon Musk did earlier this week. (At least that’s Musk’s version of events.) Coinbase was up in arms on Thursday about Apple’s decision to block its latest app release. The cryptocurrency exchange said Apple had required it to ax its feature for sending non-fungible tokens in its iPhone app because Apple claimed it should be getting paid 30% of the gas fees, a type of transaction fee associated with sending NFTs. As Aidan wrote a few months back, Coinbase isn’t the only crypto company that has a beef with the iPhone developer. And all these companies have a point. Exchanging NFTs, by definition, is done over a blockchain, which Apple’s in-app purchasing system doesn’t support to begin with.  “We couldn’t comply even if we tried,” tweeted Coinbase this morning. “This is akin to Apple trying to take a cut of fees for every email that gets sent over open Internet protocols.” And let’s not forget Mark Zuckerberg, who said on Wednesday that Apple’s control over how apps operated gave the company too much power. “The problem that you get into with the platform control is that Apple obviously has their own interests,” he said at The New York Times DealBook Summit. “There is a conflict of interest there,” he later added.  One onlooker we’re sure is avidly following these exchanges is the Department of Justice, which has reportedly been drafting an antitrust lawsuit against the iPhone maker. You can just imagine how these complaints from Coinbase, Zuckerberg et al will play into the government’s complaint, assuming it eventually surfaces.—Akash Pasricha

Circle's SPAC strategy fizzles as regulators and lawmakers sour on crypto SPAC to square one… Yesterday USDC stablecoin issuer Circle said it was bailing on plans to go public on the NYSE by merging with a special purpose acquisition company, aka SPAC. Circle is well known in crypto circles: its main stablecoin, USDC, tracks the US dollar (1 USDC = $1), and the company says it’s 100% backed by cash and US Treasuries. It’s the second-largest stablecoin by market cap (after Tether) with $43B in circulation. But now Circle’s walking back from its SPAC merger, possibly because it failed to receive the required SEC sign-off. In love and crypto… timing’s everything. Circle first announced its SPAC plan last year when crypto was booming. Earlier this year, the merger could’ve valued Circle at up to $9B and made it one of the few publicly traded crypto companies. But times have changed: TerraUSD, an algorithm stablecoin, blew up in May (unlike “fully reserved” USDC, it wasn’t backed by cash), and crypto prices have plunged further since FTX’s collapse. While Circle said it had minimal financial exposure to FTX, the SEC might be hesitant to approve crypto-related deals as it sifts through the bankrupt exchange's wreckage.

He led the chants against Xi Jinping What happened next?

When Wang first lifted his arm he was nervous. Then he pumped his fist in the air and yelled, “Communist Party?” The crowd answered him: “Down with it!” Next, Wang shouted “Xi Jinping?” The crowd reacted more tentatively to the president’s name; a few looked round to see the bespectacled young man who had dared to shout it. But they answered: “Down with him!” Wang yelled Xi’s name three more times. Each time the crowd’s response was louder: “Down with him!” Wang didn’t even know that he’d been waiting for this moment. Like most young Chinese out on the street in Shanghai, this was his first protest, aged 27. After completing his shift at a cocktail bar, it had been a quick bike ride to join the gathering. People were laying flowers and lighting candles. Many held up blank sheets of paper, a silent protest against covid lockdowns, to represent all that they wanted to say but felt they couldn’t. He was proud of his role in the protests. The feeling of satisfaction lingered the next afternoon as he served cocktails to customers on the tree-lined street. Then police officers walked into his bar.

Read the full article →

How election deniers performed in 2022

Election denial has spread and continues to undermine faith in American election systems. This isn’t good for our democracy. But don’t just take our word for it. The International Election Observation Mission of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe pointed out in its November 2022 report “noted efforts to undermine voters’ trust in the electoral process by baselessly questioning its integrity can result in systemic challenges.”

Some headlines have proclaimed that election denial wasn’t a winning strategy in 2022. That likely was the case in some key races in competitive states and districts. But it was hardly fatal in many other contests considering the sheer number of elected leaders who currently are or will be serving in office and have denied, disputed, or raised questions about election results. These hundreds of elected leaders now have bigger platforms to communicate with constituencies and continue to spread misinformation or attempt to sow seeds of doubt to prime voters to reject future election results. We already witnessed examples of this in the certification process in a couple of key states. In Cochise County, Arizona and Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, local Republican election officials refused to meet their states’ deadlines to certify election results in the face of constituents who showed up to public meetings with falsehoods or misguided information.

While candidates who made the most outrageous statements, like Doug Mastriano in Pennsylvania and Kari Lake in Arizona, garnered significant attention, the 2022 elections included a much bigger pool of candidates and elected officials. We wanted a more nuanced understanding of the outcomes and what it may mean for the future. So, we analyzed a database of 552 Republican candidates running for Senate, House of Representatives, governor, secretary of state, and attorney general in the 2022 elections. Here’s what we found:

-- 77 Republican candidates we analyzed stated that they fully accept the 2020 election results. Of those, 43 were elected in 2022. All but 4 of the 43 were incumbents for office and in contests that the Crystal Ball rated as Safe Republican or Likely Republican. The 4 exceptions were Jim Pillen, who won in the open Nebraska gubernatorial race, which the Crystal Ball rated as Safe Republican; and Laurel Lee won in the open FL-15 race, rated as Likely Republican. The other 2 contests were in very competitive House races (defined throughout as Leaning to one party or the other) in New York, where Republicans Anthony D’Esposito won in NY-4 and Mike Lawler won in NY-17.

-- 368 candidates have made statements on a spectrum from those who accepted the 2020 election outcome with reservations to those who fully denied the results, plus those who apparently avoided answering questions about it. Our analysis indicates that (as of this writing) 221 of these candidates won their election bid and 179 of them were incumbents. Of the 221 candidates who won, the Crystal Ball rated 192 of the contests as Safe Republican or Likely Republican, and 13 of them as Leans Republican. 16 candidates of the 221 were candidates for non-gubernatorial state offices that the Crystal Ball didn’t rate.

-- In the 118th Congress, all House of Representatives members from Oklahoma, West Virginia, and Wyoming have fully denied the 2020 election. One representative from Montana has fully denied and one has raised questions. In addition, all Republican members of the House from Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, and Tennessee have questioned or fully denied the 2020 election results.

-- Candidates who fully denied the 2020 election didn’t have all that much trouble raising funds. Nearly $500 million was raised by 192 candidates who fully denied results (we could not find data for one Senate candidate and six House candidates).

Maps 1-4, Figures 1-4: 2022 Senate, gubernatorial, secretary of state, attorney general, and House Republican performance by stances on 2020 election

To see the full interactive maps and figures, click on the image of Map 1

Table 1: Total number of Republican candidates in analysis by office, win or loss, and stance on 2020 election

Fully denied

About 200 (199) candidates running in 2022 fully denied the results of the 2020 election, and 138 of them won in 2022. Where did they run for office and where did they win? The answer to these questions follows and to us paints a picture of election denial used as a means to appeal to a party base and sow division.

More than 100 (120) candidates who fully denied the 2020 election ran for office in districts rated by the Crystal Ball as Safe Republican and all of them won; 112 of them were incumbents. Five out of seven who ran in districts rated by the Crystal Ball as Likely Republican districts won.

Two candidates who fully denied Election 2020 results ran in districts rated by the Crystal Ball as Likely Democratic. 36 ran in Safe Democratic districts. None won.

Of the 61 candidates in this category who lost their election bid, just 13 were running in highly competitive races (rated as leaning one way or the other). Some of those candidates were running in high-profile races such as Michigan governor, Arizona governor, and Nevada senator, among others.

Thirteen candidates in this category were running in districts rated by the Crystal Ball as Leans Republican (AZ-1, AZ-2, Arizona governor, CA-27, NV-3, NM-2, NY-3, NC-13, Ohio Senate, OH-1, PA-8, TX-34, and Wisconsin Senate). Just 6 won (AZ-1, AZ-2, CA-27, NY-3, Ohio Senate, and Wisconsin Senate).

Seven contests were rated Leans Democratic by the Crystal Ball (AK-at-Large, CO-7, Michigan governor, Nevada Senate, NV-4, NH-1, and OH-9). None of the candidates who have fully denied the election running in a Leans Democratic race won.

This category had the highest number of state level races for secretary of state and attorney general. These offices have power to oversee election processes and to certify outcomes. The Crystal Ball doesn’t rate state level races, but our colleague Louis Jacobson has written about them in depth. Six of the candidates who have fully denied election results won -- Ashley Moody (Florida Attorney General), Raúl R. Labrador (Idaho Attorney General), Kris Kobach (Kansas Attorney General), Alan Wilson (South Carolina Attorney General), Ken Paxton (Texas Attorney General), and Chuck Gray (Wyoming Secretary of State).

Seven candidates who fully denied the 2020 election lost in 2022: Mark Finchem (Arizona Secretary of State), Kristina Karamo (Michigan Secretary of State) Matthew DePerno (Michigan Attorney General), Kim Crockett (Minnesota Secretary of State), Jim Marchant (Nevada Secretary of State), Audrey Trujillo (New Mexico Secretary of State), and H. Brooke Paige (Vermont Secretary of State).

Abraham Hamadeh (Arizona Attorney General) is currently slightly behind in his race as it goes to a recount. On Nov. 22, Hamadeh joined the Republican National Committee in filing a lawsuit against Kris Mayes, the Democratic attorney general candidate, Arizona Secretary of State (and Gov.-elect) Katie Hobbs (D), and 15 county recorders and boards of supervisors challenging the results of the 2022 election for Arizona attorney general. On Nov. 29, a judge dismissed the legal challenge, finding that it “is premature under the election contest statute” given that “the canvass and declaration of results for the November 2022 election have not occurred.” However, the judge left open the possibility that Hamadeh can file a new “election contest after the canvass and declaration of election results have occurred.”

Raised questions

We categorized 59 candidates as having raised questions about the 2020 election. Of this group, 22 won in 2022 and 37 lost. Most candidates who raised questions about the 2020 election and who won did so in districts or states the Crystal Ball rated Safe or Likely Republican districts. Four candidates in this category won in districts rated Leans Republican (MT-1, Nevada governor, NY-1, and OR-5).

Most candidates in this category who lost in 2022 (28 candidates), did so in districts the Crystal Ball rated Safe or Likely Democratic districts. Among the 11 races that the Crystal Ball rated as highly competitive, 6 candidates in this category lost (Pennsylvania Senate, Maine governor, Wisconsin governor, MI-7, AZ-4, and MI-3).

Accepted with reservations

The database included 92 candidates who accepted the 2020 election with reservations. Results in this category tell us more about incumbency than anything else, and perhaps a story of candidates making statements to hedge their bets in competitive races.

Of this group, 57 were elected, 35 lost. Fifty-one of the candidates in this category who won were incumbents and they were rated as either Safe or Likely Republican by Crystal Ball. Of the 35 candidates who lost, the majority -- 22 of them -- were in districts rated Safe or Likely Democratic by Crystal Ball.

Eleven contests with candidates in this category were highly competitive (leaning one way or the other). Just 3 candidates who accepted with reservations won in competitive races (North Carolina Senate, NY-22, and VA-2).

Four who won in this category were races that the Crystal Ball doesn’t rate -- Secretary of State in Idaho, Indiana and North Dakota, and the Attorney General race in Alabama.

Avoided answering

Eighteen candidates intentionally avoided answering questions about their position on the 2020 election. Among them, 4 candidates won in 2022, most notably Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (rated Safe Republican). The others were Rep. Chuck Edwards (NC-11), Arkansas Secretary of State John Thurston, and North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley, all of whom were in Safe Republican races (Edwards beat lightning rod first-term Rep. Madison Cawthorn in a primary). Among the 14 candidates who did not win, only 3 candidates were running in competitive districts that the Crystal Ball rated as Leans Democratic (OR-4, NY-18, and the New Mexico gubernatorial election); the remainder of candidates (9) were running in Safe or Likely Democratic districts. One is a state race that the CB doesn’t rate (Massachusetts Secretary of State).

No comment

This final category of Republican candidates includes 107 candidates who didn’t make a comment on the 2020 election that we could find. We still wanted to know what happened in the elections with these candidates.

Of this group of candidates, only 23 of them were elected. Ten of the 23 elected were rated Safe Republican by the Crystal Ball (LA-5, NE-1, OH-15, FL-4, IN-2, MS-4, NY-23, TX-38, & the Tennessee and Wyoming gubernatorial races); one was rated Likely Republican (NJ-7); and 6 were rated Leans Republican (CA-13, CA-45, AZ-6, IA-3, MI-10, and NY-19). Six were state races not rated by the Crystal Ball.

Of the 84 candidates who didn’t win, only 7 were running for office in truly competitive races:  CT-5, IL-17, IN-1, OH-13, PA-7, PA-17, and TX-28.

The remaining races where Republicans didn’t make a comment were rated Safe Democratic by Crystal Ball.

Campaign contributions

Another point to consider is that candidates who fully denied the results of the 2020 election didn’t have all that much trouble fundraising, though some clearly struggled. Nearly $500 million ($496,177,081) was raised by 192 candidates who fully denied results (we could not find data for a single Senate candidate and 6 House candidates). For comparison, candidates who ran in opposition to those who fully denied the election raised nearly $515 million ($514,990,421).

Tables 2 and 3: Campaign money raised by Republican candidates who fully denied 2020 election

Notes: The amount raised by one Senate candidate who fully denied the election, Chris Chaffee of Maryland, could not be determined, most likely because they didn’t make the federal threshold required to report. **The amount raised could not be found for 6 House candidates who fully denied the election, most likely because they didn’t make the federal threshold required to report.  ***Nine candidates who fully denied the election ran unopposed (AZ-8, AZ-9, FL-5, PA-13, PA-14, SC-3, SC-4, TX-11, TX-31); The amount raised could not be found for an additional 13 House candidates who ran in opposition to election deniers, most likely because they didn’t make the federal threshold required to report. 

Notes: *Chuck Gray in Wyoming ran unopposed. **Alan Wilson in South Carolina ran unopposed. The amount raised by Chris Mann, the Democratic candidate in Kansas, could not be found.

Prominent funders (either through direct contributions or SuperPACs) of candidates who fully denied the 2020 election included: packaging supplies magnates Richard and Elizabeth Uihlein; former Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne; former President Donald Trump’s Save America PAC; Michael Rydin, CEO of a Texas construction software company; Home Depot co-founder Bernard Marcus; MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell; food restaurateur Lewis Topper; retired physicist and entrepreneur Norman Rogers; and The Presidential Coalition, which is led by David Bossie, whom the Trump campaign initially assigned to lead its 2020 election challenge efforts.

It’s also worth noting that some candidates who did not make a statement denying the results of the 2020 election may have also accepted money from sources tied the Stop the Steal movement. For example, New Mexico gubernatorial candidate Mark Ronchetti, who avoided answering questions, accepted cash donations from three fake electors and one other person who was accused of attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Conclusion

The good news is that surveys show a majority of Americans are confident their votes will be accurately cast and counted. The bad news is that confidence is still at historic lows and, not surprisingly, there is a partisan divide.

Figure 5: Confidence in accuracy of elections over time by partisanship

To see the full interactive Figure 5, click on its image below

Public concerns about election fairness, security, and safety of course need to be taken seriously. And, election administration can always be improved, from increasing voting machines to better ballot design and process management, and consistent application of voting laws, just to name a few. The bigger challenge ahead, however, is to address the continued concerted efforts by those in power (or seeking it) to use unfounded claims of voter fraud to erode public trust in elections for their own political purposes. The extent to which unfounded claims of election fraud have become integrated into campaigns and used as a tools for fundraising efforts are particularly corrosive to democratic institutions when they translate into attempts to reshape voting laws that create divergent access and rights, and contribute to rising violent threats against election workers. And while it may be a challenge endemic to one party now, that doesn’t mean the roles won’t reverse in the future.

Finally, Newton’s third law may very well apply to the politics of election denialism. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction; for every voter mobilization, there is a counter voter mobilization. In response to the election denialism as a campaign strategy, millions of voters showed up to the polls in 2022 mobilized by the belief that democracy itself was on the ballot. This itself may reverberate into the future by setting the stage for a partisan arms race that further exacerbates conflict and tensions over claims to electoral legitimacy.

-- Center for Politics interns Clara Getty, Emily Horn, and Tori Frahm contributed to data collection for this analysis.

Sources: FiveThirtyEight election deniers GitHub data, Center for Responsive Politics, U.S. Census Bureau, Transparency USA, Project Vote Smart and various state elections departments.

EUROPE

Belgium makes EU parliament arrests in Qatar corruption investigation

Belgian police arrested a European Parliament vice-president and four others in connection with an investigation into corruption implicating World Cup hosts Qatar, the prosecutors office said Friday.

US Congress Approves Bill to Avert Major Freight Rail Strike The bill, approved by the Senate Thursday after passing with a bipartisan majority in the House of Representatives, effectively forces hold-out unions to accept a deal on higher wages, which a majority of unions had agreed to.  FULL ARTICLE  Army Reserve Soldiers Are Overlooked Source of Talent First-of-a-kind partnership between the city of Fayetteville, N.C. and the Army Reserves helps companies and army reserve soldiers find each other.  FULL ARTICLE  So That Happened: The Continuous Improvement Way Back Machine, Smart Manufacturing Goes to College IndustryWeek leaders share those stories and look into manufacturing opportunities for the blind and what's up with steel pricing.  FULL ARTICLE  Advertisement Taming Complexity to Drive Business Value Discover how one company built out a complete manufacturing operating system with no additional coding required, improving reliability and scalability, and reducing time to value.  Learn More  Editor's Choice 2023 Manufacturing Outlook Survey Share your views on the economy, supply chain, employment and pricing.  FULL ARTICLE

 

 

Tesla finally delivers first Semi long-haul electric truck The class-defining production truck has a range of about 300 or 500 mi depending on battery capacity thanks to its less than 2-kW·h/mi energy consumption, while three independent motors on the rear axles can accelerate it from 0-60 mph in 20 s and maintain the highway speed limit up a 5% grade.

Mazda updates strategy with greater focus on electrification and carbon neutrality In addition to completing the electrification of all vehicle models by 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality in all its operations by 2050, the company is targeting zero fatal accidents caused be new Mazdas by 2040.

Toyota redesigns Prius for better styling and performance The pioneering hybrid electric car has evolved under the Hybrid Reborn theme using a fifth-generation hybrid system and second-generation TNGA platform for a design “that users will fall in love with at first sight” and “captivating driving performance.”

Genesis completes EV concept trilogy with X Convertible The X Convertible shares its architecture and electric powertrain with the X Concept and X Speedium Coupe concepts and features a folding hardtop roof that integrates transparent moon roofs above the front occupants to provide an open feel when closed.

OPINION CULTURE There Will Never Be Another Twitter By Ryan Broderick Chances are that at this point, two months into Elon Musk’s reign at Twitter, you’ve heard at least one social network heralded as the site’s replacement. Post News, Mastodon, Hive, resurrected Tumblr accounts, Substack, TikTok or Instagram for those who don’t mind some images with their text—basically every platform out there that isn’t Facebook has been offered up as a possible Twitter alternative. All of them, however, leave something to be desired. Mastodon’s federation concept, in which “instances,” aka servers, can be linked together by administrators, has been called clunky and confusing by new users trying to sign up. Hive has already had to shut down once this month to reevaluate its security infrastructure. (It’s now back online.) Substacks are too long and too slow to give Twitter users the fast dopamine hit they’ve come to crave. And Tumblr, with its indecipherable memes and sprawling fandoms, is simply too weird for most users. Like astronauts hoping to find a Goldilocks planet to colonize, Twitter diehards continue to explore, hope and pray. Also like those astronauts, they might not have unlimited time. Musk is drastically changing Twitter’s moderation policy, redesigning how core features work and hemorrhaging both advertisers and engineers. If the past is any guide, any one of those things on its own could be enough to kill the bird site dead.    READ THE FULL STORY